Tories announce energy price rises for those who shop around to protect big business

michaels

There are only about 50 energy suppliers in the UK - it must be a pretty big meeting when they all get together and collude on prices.

There are only 4 big supermarkets, I think they should be nationalised or at the very least prices fixed. I particularly dislike the promotions whereby those customers who can be bothered to shop around pay less than everyone else.

It is not fair, if I am too lazy to look for the lowest price then it is only fair that everyone pays more.

mrginge

michaels wrote: »

There are only about 50 energy suppliers in the UK - it must be a pretty big meeting when they all get together and collude on prices.

There are only 4 big supermarkets, I think they should be nationalised or at the very least prices fixed. I particularly dislike the promotions whereby those customers who can be bothered to shop around pay less than everyone else.

It is not fair, if I am too lazy to look for the lowest price then it is only fair that everyone pays more.

I hadn't realised that all the stuff I can buy in one of the four big supermarkets was not available from any other retail outlet.

I guess you live and learn.

Good to know that energy supply is as functioning and diverse a market as food retailing is.

michaels

After all food is much more of an essential than energy and whilst there are more than 50 food retailers (and energy suppliers), the majority of the public shop at the 'big 4' so it must be a cartel and unfair.

molerat

If anyone believes that this government meddling will actually mean "vulnerable" customers paying any less then I am afraid they are seriously deluded.

mrginge

michaels wrote: »

After all food is much more of an essential than energy and whilst there are more than 50 food retailers (and energy suppliers), the majority of the public shop at the 'big 4' so it must be a cartel and unfair.

They don't shop at the big four for everything and they aren't forced to got to the same place for 12 months once they've signed up to that particular supermarket.
And I absolutely guarantee that before you trot off to Tesco you don't spend 15 minutes checking how much everything you want costs at Asda.

The issue on switching is that it's a system designed to be complex, for relatively little perceived benefit and to deter people from doing it. By definition it is anti-competitive.

If I had to guess I would expect that lower income people were less likely to switch and were therefore disproportionately affected by a poorly managed system.

So if the govt decide that energy companies need a bit of a nudge to design pricing models that actually incentivise switching rather blocking it then fair enough in my book.

michaels

Not at all mysupermarket.co.uk helps me plan what to get at each supermarket as I am passing.

I have switched energy suppliers multiple times in the same year (cashback helps) - lock-ins are not nearly as draconian as for example TV and phone providers.

And switching is a no brainer as just like phone companies and car insurers new customer rates are loss leaders. If BG are forced to make less profit on every non-switching customer then they won't be able to offer such good new customer deals as they would then not be profitable - so suddenly there would be much less reason to switch. And guess what if you make switching less attractive then companies will no longer have to compete as hard and there will not be so many new suppliers.

So basically restricting competition will actually lead to higher prices overall even if they are perhaps slightly more equal. This will be good news for the big suppliers with established customer bases as they won't have to offer lower prices to hold on to their customers or attract new ones. No wonder the politicians are in favour, helps them in their next move into the boardroom.

mrginge

I'm afraid your perception is typical in that if something is easy for you then it must be easy for everyone.

The reality is sometimes govt policy has to be geared towards less able people than you and me.

The fact that two thirds of people are sitting on standard tariffs when it's apparently (according to you) dead easy to not be would suggest that the market is not operating as freely as it should.

sss555s

I'd like to see company's restricted to 2 or 3 plans for gas and electricity with prices held for a longer time. This changing plans every couple of months by changing the date at the end of the plan is daylight robbery and taking advantage of pensioners and the poor in general who don't use computers.
Why should the more able in society benefit at the expense of the poor or incapable when it comes to utility bills?

Spidernick

Are the right-wing press deriding this idea as much as they did when Ed Miliband's Labour Party proposed something similar a couple of years back? I somehow doubt it!

michaels

mrginge wrote: »

I'm afraid your perception is typical in that if something is easy for you then it must be easy for everyone.

The reality is sometimes govt policy has to be geared towards less able people than you and me.

The fact that two thirds of people are sitting on standard tariffs when it's apparently (according to you) dead easy to not be would suggest that the market is not operating as freely as it should.

Lots of people shop at Asda as they perceive it as cheap but actually if you but special offers other supermarkets are cheaper. Are you demanding the govt intervenes?

Lots of people buy their iphones in a contract bundles direct from one of the big networks when they could have it much cheaper from a piggyback operator or by buying the handset and airtime seperately. I don't hear the howls for the govt to cap prices....